A Crucial Election for Medical Research

Published: November 1, 2000

As a Parkinson's disease patient and a new American citizen, I look forward to Election Day as something momentous: It's not just the first presidential race in which I can vote (I was born in Canada). The outcome is likely to have a dramatic bearing on my prognosis — and that of millions of Americans whose lives have been touched by Parkinson's, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, spinal cord injury, Huntington's disease, Alzheimer's disease and other devastating illnesses. That's because one question that may be decided on Tuesday is whether stem cell research — which holds the best hope of a cure for such diseases — will be permitted to go forward.

Campaign aides to George W. Bush, who has not publicly addressed the issue, stated on several occasions that a Bush administration would overturn current National Institutes of Health guideines and ban federal funding for stem cell research. Why? Because the research, which uses human embryos discarded from fertility clinics, has become enmeshed in the politics of abortion. Mr. Bush favors a ban on stem cell research, one aide said, "because of his pro-life views."

Yet stem cell research has nothing to do with abortion. It is not the same as fetal tissue research, the federal funding of which was banned by Presidents Reagan and Bush (but has since been authorized by Congress). Stem cell work uses undifferentiated cells extracted from embryos just a few days old — embryos produced during in vitro fertilization, a process that creates many more fertilized eggs than are implanted in the wombs of women trying to become pregnant. Currently, more than 100,000 embryos are frozen in storage. Most of these microscopic clumps of cells are destined to be destroyed — ending any potential for life.

Their potential for saving lives, however, may be unlimited. Given the proper signal or environment, stem cells, transplanted into human tissue, can be induced to develop into brain, heart, skin, bone marrow cells — indeed, any specialized cells. The scientific research community believes that the transplanted stem cells may be able to regenerate dead or dying human tissue, reversing the progress of disease. According to Cure, a coalition of 28 groups representing patients with cancer, Parkinson's, paralysis and other maladies, "no research in recent history has offered as much hope" for cures.

Support for stem-cell research comes not just from pro-choice Democrats like Al Gore but also from Republicans who have concluded, in the words of former Senator Bob Dole, that supporting such research is "the pro-life position to take."

The list includes Republican senators like Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, John McCain of Arizona, Connie Mack of Florida and Pete Domenici of New Mexico. Even Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon, who the National Right to Life Committee says voted "the right way" on abortion every time last year, supports the research. His family has experience with the ravages of Parkinson's disease, and he has concluded, "Part of my pro-life ethic is to make life better for the living."

This is the real compassionate conservatism. One hopes that between now and next Tuesday, Mr. Bush will explain to those of us with debilitating diseases — indeed, to all of us — why it is more pro-life to throw away stem cells than to put them to work saving lives.

Michael J. Fox, the actor, is active in organizations working to combat Parkinson's disease.